Yoo v. FBI NICS

Yoo v. FBI NICS

Case Number:	4:2020cv00665
Filed:	April 20, 2021
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office:	Fort Worth Office
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner Pet/Other: Mandamus & Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 20, 2021	Filing 39 OPINION and ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS: It is therefore ORDERED that the FBI's motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) is GRANTED, such that Yoo's remaining claims in the complaint for mandamus relief must be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and alternatively, DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 8/20/2021) (sre)
April 20, 2021	Filing 15 OPINION and ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A & 1915(e)(2)(B): It is therefore ORDERED that all of Heon Jong Yoo's constitutional claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) an d 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It is further ORDERED that all of Heon Jong Yoo's claims against Charles Van Cleef are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It is f urther ORDERED that to the extent Heon Jong Yoo asserts a claim against Brian Barker, such claim is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Yoo's motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 13 ) is DENIED. Yoo's motion for default judgment (ECF No. 14 ) is DENIED. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/20/2021) (pef)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 20, 2021

Filing 39 OPINION and ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS: It is therefore ORDERED that the FBI's motion to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) is GRANTED, such that Yoo's remaining claims in the complaint for mandamus relief must be DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction, and alternatively, DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 8/20/2021) (sre)

April 20, 2021

Filing 15 OPINION and ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A & 1915(e)(2)(B): It is therefore ORDERED that all of Heon Jong Yoo's constitutional claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) an d 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It is further ORDERED that all of Heon Jong Yoo's claims against Charles Van Cleef are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). It is f urther ORDERED that to the extent Heon Jong Yoo asserts a claim against Brian Barker, such claim is DISMISSED without prejudice to refiling under authority of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Yoo's motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 13 ) is DENIED. Yoo's motion for default judgment (ECF No. 14 ) is DENIED. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/20/2021) (pef)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Yoo v. FBI NICS
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?